Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

3 engines helicopter

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

3 engines helicopter

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12th Jun 2009, 09:48
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: france
Age: 53
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
3 engines helicopter

Hi everybody!
A friend of my told me that crews operating on EH101 or Ch53 shut-down everytime one engine during cruise. I'm a bit surprise by his propose. I found an article wich explained that a crew during a csar mission had shut down one engine due to the long distance, but it was exceptional.
If somebody who knows what is the reality it could be useful for my helicopter knowledge!
Thanks by advance
saloon64 is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 10:07
  #2 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
News: EH-101 demonstates SAR & Rescue credentials

"A key feature of the EH101 in SAR service is its ability to undertake long range cruise on two engines whilst reverting to three engines for the rescue operation. The three-engine configuration is especially significant in search and rescue operations since, unlike current SAR helicopters, the EH101would be able to continue with its mission even if one of its engines failed in the hover."

Rotor & Wing Magazine :: Presidential Debate

"Both the EH101 and S-92 were designed as Sea King replacements, albeit for different missions. In the late 1970s, AgustaWestland (then EH Industries) aimed at a helicopter that would pack more fuel and sub-hunting electronics in the Sea King footprint aboard British and Italian warships. To carry about 50 percent more than a Sea King, yet recover from a hover in an engine-out emergency, the EH101 used three engines to turn its five-bladed main rotor."
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 10:25
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes on 16 Posts
I may be (probably am) wrong but isn't there an issue with power/weight ratio on the EHI-01 which means it can't make use of its designed ability to turn an engine off for more economical cruising other than in very specific circumstances?
The Helpful Stacker is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 10:40
  #4 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes on 222 Posts
Perhaps EHI 01 crew will comment on the SOPs but it's a fact that two turbines at high power are more efficient than three at medium power so I see no real issue with it.

Thirty years ago, when this aircraft concept was being discussed between the UK's military (to decide on the Air Staff Target), I understood that the Royal Navy demanded an aircraft that could continue to hover if an engine failed. Due to the limitations and relatively low capability of the available engines in those days, some lateral thinking saw that on an aircraft of this size, three engines was actually more practical than two.

Delays to the aircraft occurred because of the inherent complications of a three engined helicopter main gearbox; I recall reading an article some years ago that claimed only one company in the world was capable of machining the casings.
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 15:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I may be (probably am) wrong but isn't there an issue with power/weight ratio on the EHI-01 which means it can't make use of its designed ability to turn an engine off for more economical cruising other than in very specific circumstances?
You can normally get a better range with the two engine cruise.

There are concerns with wanting the third engine should you require coming to a hover, and you have to be aware of height loss should you lose one of the two operating engines. Because of those considerations, it is only wise to consider two engine cruise when you're planning long distance cruises.

Matthew.
Matthew Parsons is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 18:12
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC USA
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
H-53E/Wessex 5

The H-53E operators manual allows for dual engine cruise should mission requirements dictate. Specific fuel consumption improves by about 7% and adds about 50 NM to the aircraft’s maximum range. Twenty five years ago I was provided with the opportunity to fly the Wessex 5 off of HMS Hermes. The Wessex also allowed one of its two engines to be secured for long range cruise. One fond memory that sticks in my mind was what a great machine the Wessex was. Beast is the first word that comes to mind.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 19:28
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: PORTUGAL
Age: 41
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EH101 two engines operations

Hello

We at Portuguese Air Force use TEO (two engines operations) for long range operations.
The only bad thing in TEO is working in cold weather because the first limitation is the TIT, and if you have to turn on the intakes and anti-ice system the TIT will rise and you have to reduce the power applied.
And you can safely fly away from a hover with 92% of torque applied if you have a engine failure.


FlySafe
CARLOS82 is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 22:35
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mmmm ....

And in the mid 1960s early 1970s the French Super Frelon SA321 was doing all this then! ... so whats new ?

spinwing is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2009, 23:01
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC USA
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Two V three

Spinwing makes a very valid point. The Super Frelon was a three holer back in the 60’s. The number of engines was more a function of the lack of any larger power plants available at the time that would permit a two engine design rather than an over powering desire to have sufficient OEI power. Typically one designs to a lift requirement not an OEI requirement. In the case of the H-53E, it was proposed as an Engineering Change Plan (ECP) to and existing design, the CH-53D. The requirement was for a 100% increase in payload (8 tons to 16 tons). This was accomplished with a 50% increase in power by installing a third engine. Only 16 were to be built. The program finally matured after more than 200 machines. A later requirement for an OEI fly away capability from a down wind TOW operation precipitated the installation of three 5000 ESHP T64-GE-419 engines in the USN’s MH-53Es.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2009, 10:35
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,222
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
The Super Frelon had three engines with a Sikorsky S64 rotor and tail rotor assembly to hold it up. This made it the only French designed helicopter with an anti-clockwise rotation viewing from the top. In the late seventies there was a line of them in Aerospat's hangar awaiting clearance from the White House before they, and their American components, could be shipped to the Peoples Republic of China..
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2009, 18:24
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TEO cruise EH101

The EH101 burns +/- 900KG/Hour with the 3 engines operative.
By shutting down engine #3 the fuel consumption goes down to 700kg, that's why we do TEO cruise ( Two engines operative) for long range.
calaim is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2009, 19:56
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
and you have to be aware of height loss should you lose one of the two operating engines
what is the height loss if you go down to single engine in the cruise?
or i could say what is the "safe sector altitude" for going from 2 to 1 engines, till you get the 3rd going ?, I bet its got some fancy name !

CF
Camp Freddie is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2009, 20:06
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: KPHL
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Camp Freddie,

We don't know. I'll be testing to determine that later this year. However, if you can start the engines in less than one minute and can reduce your rate of descent in an autorotation to 1500-2000fpm, then its a safe bet that your altitude loss would be less than 2000' when you have one engine helping.
Matthew Parsons is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.